Re:Coin
by abalone on Thursday November 14, 2013 @03:04PM
(#6735128)
I think you are mistaken about card rules. To protect themselves against chargebacks the merchant needs to keep a copy of the signed credit card slip, not a physical imprint of the card. That's actually better than a physical imprint (which is impossible on many cards these days anyway) because a matching signature can prove who used the card, not just that the card was physically present.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Worth looking into! Thanks. I know there's been at several cases where we specifically lost because of lack of imprint, but another thing I've learned in dealing with the credit card issuers is that, despite what we hope, there is MASSIVE inconsistency in the application of chargeback rules. Sometimes you'll lose a chargeback because the issuer just wants to be nice their cardholder (Amex is guilty of this) and they'll literally make up reasons for the loss.
We actually had Amex _negotiate_ with us over a chargeback once. I had no idea this was even possible -- they actually said "So how about we'll agree to split the loss. We'll cover half, you guys cover half." I had no idea that was even an option.
My understanding is that US banks can write a proportion of the loss off against tax, so 50/50 splits are not that unusual. But it probably depends on the circumstances.
I'm in the UK and this is not really my area, so you'd probably have a better chance of verifying that than me.